Also known as: transferor courts · transferring court
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
The federal district court from which a civil action is transferred to another district under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) or § 1406(a). The transferor court supplies the governing state law and choice-of-law rules that the transferee court must apply after a § 1404(a) transfer from a proper venue. A transferor court lacking personal jurisdiction retains authority to order a § 1406(a) transfer in the interest of justice.
Tristan Thompson filed a diversity suit in federal court in New Jersey against Topaz Mining after an accident on his Pennsylvania farm. Realizing New Jersey choice-of-law rules favored him, Thompson moved under § 1404(a) to transfer to federal court in Delaware. After the transfer, the Delaware court applied New Jersey substantive law and choice-of-law rules because the New Jersey court had been a proper venue.
Travis Tate sued Talon Security in federal court in Maine for events that occurred entirely in Nevada. The Maine court lacked personal jurisdiction over Talon Security and venue was improper. Tate moved under § 1406(a) to transfer to federal court in Nevada. The Maine court granted the transfer even though it lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
Thaddeus Tran sued Titan Industries in federal court in State R after an accident in State Q. Venue was proper in State R. After discovery showed most witnesses were in State Q, Tran moved under § 1404(a) to transfer to federal court in State Q. The State Q court applied the same choice-of-law rules the State R court would have used.
On October 4, 1960, a commercial airliner scheduled to fly from Boston to Philadelphia plunged into Boston Harbor shortly after departing from a Boston airport. This crash led to the institution of over 150 actions for personal injury and wrongful death against the airline, manufacturers of the aircraft, the United States, and in some cases the Massachusetts Port Authority. More than 100 of these actions were brought in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. More than 45 actions were instituted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The present case involves 40 wrongful death actions brought in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by personal representatives of victims of the crash. These plaintiffs are described as Pennsylvania fiduciaries representing the estates of Pennsylvania decedents. The defendants moved under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to transfer these actions to the District of Massachusetts. The defendants alleged that most of the witnesses resided there and that over 100 other actions were already pending in that district. The District Court granted the defendants' motion to transfer the actions. The plaintiffs sought a writ of mandamus from the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The Court of Appeals held that the District Court had erred and should vacate its transfer order. The Court of Appeals concluded that a transfer could be granted only if the plaintiffs had qualified to sue in Massachusetts at the time the suits were brought in Pennsylvania. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review important questions concerning the construction and operation of § 1404(a). Prior citations in the case include the District Court decision at 204 F. Supp. 426 and the Court of Appeals decision at 309 F. 2d 953.
View caseThe transferee court must apply the same state substantive law and choice-of-law rules that the transferor court would have applied. This rule holds even when the plaintiff requested the transfer after initially choosing an inconvenient forum.
Yes. A federal district court that lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendant may transfer the action under § 1406(a) to a district where the case could have been brought if transfer serves the interest of justice.
No. Authority supports the view that a court may transfer under § 1404(a) for convenience even when it lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
…under § 1404(a) initiated by a defendant, the transferee court must follow the choice-of-law rules that prevailed in the transferor court. We now decide that, when a plaintiff moves for the transfer, the same rule applies. I Albert Ferens lost his right hand when, the allegation is, it became caught in his combine…